tungsten rod nuke effect?

from AshesoftheSingularity Forums

I don't play against the AI much, but I have been doing it for the last couple of days.

It's pretty enjoyable -- mostly because I can also pause, for a change (I usually play MP).

Anyhoo, while playing today, I noticed something REALLY odd... first time I ever took note of it, I guess. 

I finished a game (beat the virtual pants off the AI), and I had so much fun doing so that I decided to mop up the remaining mess on the map, and I kept playing after game end. 

I had an absolutely ridiculous number of T1 units, all formed up on my end of the map, and I also had a HUGE amount of quanta.. so decided to have some fun.

... with nukes.

SO.

I built the orbital command quickly enough, centered the screen on my units, wished them well in the afterlife... and wammo.

5... 4....3....2....1.... BOOOOM.

 

(Well, maybe not boom exactly... not sure what to call the visual effect... dramatic poofey cloud, or something.)

 

The poofey boom happened, and...

All of my troops were still there, standing in place.

"Wow," I thought.

"My T1 units must have been high enough level to survive a nuke."

So I clicked on one.

And it wasn't damaged, not even a little.

Then I clicked on another, and found the same.

Then a third.

Then it dawned on me that nukes don't damage your own units that are within the blast radius.

 

REALY?!

I tested it a couple of times to be absolutely sure.

I now have a whole new "forward charging engineer" tactic that I can use.... 

 

"Ker-powee. I'll bet he didn't expect that!!!"

 

Additional thoughts:

 

1) This is like an "early nintendo" degree of totally unrealistic super ability.

2) I'm going to throw my chips on the table and say nukes should damage EVERYTHING in blast radius.

 

 

31,049 views 7 replies
Reply #1 from AshesoftheSingularity Forums Top

Yeah I would like to see these weapons to be indiscriminate to what it kills. Its been like that not damaging your own since release as far as I can remember. I do think they should kill friends and foes alike and make them more strategic in their use, instead of allowing reckless use of the weapon. Pretty much any rts game with super weapons is a risk to use near your own forces as they can get wiped out by it as well.

Reply #2 from AshesoftheSingularity Forums Top

I like to think of it that they are have adapted their own technology to make them indestructible to their own weaponry.  Like how the Borg adapt and the Enterprise rotate their shield frequencies.

Changing the way in which orbital's work would make them an offensive measure only.  And one in which would result in friendly casualties most of the time.

Sins of a Solar Empire: Rebellion
Reply #3 from Stardock Forums Top

Heh, first time you've noticed this?  Yeah, this is one of the (several) reasons that I hate the implementation of nukes in this game and why I was happy to finally see a no-nukes option added to the lobby.

A player shouldn't be able to 'clean' their currently-under-assault base or instantly "win target fight" by dropping a nuke in the center of it and continuing unscathed with business as usual. 

Reply #4 from AshesoftheSingularity Forums Top

Quoting Sakhari, reply 3

A player shouldn't be able to 'clean' their currently-under-assault base or instantly "win target fight" by dropping a nuke in the center of it and continuing unscathed with business as usual. 

 

Well, it's not THAT simple. There is a countdown, and it is usually possible to save some troops.

 

BTW, my experience is that lvl4+ can sometimes live through a nuke.

Reply #5 from AshesoftheSingularity Forums Top

It needs to be this way, orbital nulifiers  and mobile nulifiers means that you need to set up properly against someone who is good at the game.

I don't expect many of you guys to of played much in the ways of high rank or skill. That's not mean't to be something that offends.

However when playing against someone who is very good, using a nuke doesn't really do anything.

You can nulify with a power at a quarter of the cost. If he's gone to the trouble of creeping nulifiers or placing highly expensive and weak units to stop you doing that. Then go him.

The fact that our powers only affect our enemy is good game play and not really caring about realism.

We are fighting with drones on other planets and we operate on a transmission level. We compute things through unknown resources and turn planets from lush greenery into hunks of metal.

This isn't mean't to be real.. that's all I'm saying. It makes good game play however. 

Comparing the super weapons to other games is a little useless especially since the games I can think of right now have no way to stop it hitting, therefore no super is a waste so to speak. 

Reply #6 from Stardock Forums Top

Quoting Freyja_Bjorn, reply 5

Comparing the super weapons to other games is a little useless especially since the games I can think of right now have no way to stop it hitting, therefore no super is a waste so to speak.

Just out of curiosity, which games are you thinking of?

Supreme Commander 1 and 2, Planetary Annihilation, Act of War, Act of Aggression, and even Sins in a roundabout way have counters in the form of anti-nuke structures (meaning, the shooter has something to lose if they fire a shot without checking for counters) and you also get visual and audio cues that there was a launch long before they hit ground.

StarCraft 1 and 2, Dawn of War 2, Company of Heroes 1 and 2, Battle For Middle Earth 1 and 2 and World in Conflict don't have direct counters but they all give players significant visual and audio cues which allow time for someone who's paying attention to move and mitigate most of the damage.

I never got into the C&C series so I don't know.  Maybe that's the exception.

In all of the games that I can think of with call-in abilities, it's very easy to use one to no effect on a player who's paying attention and they've always been more or less 'fine'.  And in all of these games, units in the blast radius generally aren't left in good shape regardless of who owns them.

Competitive players find a way to work within the confines of whatever system is in place and my point isn't that nukes are overpowered or unbeatable.  I know full well from my own experience that they aren't.  I disagree, though with the notion that the all-or-nothing nuke/nullifier system serves 'good gameplay' and having seen plenty of other examples over the last 20-ish years, I don't understand why it's supposedly necessary for nukes to work the way they do here.  And why friendly-fire needs to be disabled.  To me, that's just a bizarre choice...

But that's all spitting into the wind since I can play without them now so... whatever, I suppose.

Reply #7 from AshesoftheSingularity Forums Top

Quoting Freyja_Bjorn, reply 5

It makes good game play however. 

Umm.. disagree.

Tough choices make better game play. 

"I can bust all your troops" is more like a no brainer.

(maybe just a little brain, because there is a quanta cost, but it could become a much more painful choice if it damages your own troops.)